robotwarsfandomcom-20200215-history
Talk:Attila the Drum
Attila the Drum or Jackson Wallop? This is a tough one. I always considered that since Attila the Drum came third in the annihilator, plus got a nomination for an award, it would surpass Jackson Wallop, who only won one battle, which was a team effort with Gyrobot. I don't know. Discussion; Toon Ganondorf (t ' 08:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC) :Maybe, but how is being nominated for an award any more significant than being put into a video game (you wanted Granny's Revenge over Purple Predator, so please don't change your mind now)? We agreed on the more successful robot, and seeing as Jackson Wallop got further than Attila The Drum did (Second round versus First round, no contest), that was what we've got. CBFan 09:26, 2 April 2009 (UTC) We also have fourth round of annihilator vs second round. I think that Atilla the Drum is more noteworthy. Attila passed through three battles, and Jackson passed through one. Just something to consider. As for the nomination, the video game had nothing to do with its prowess, as the game designers had no affiliation with the shows producers and judges, etc. But that is not my main arguement, its the fact that Attila got through more battles than Jackson. 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' 09:33, 2 April 2009 (UTC) :Has Jackson Wallop been in an annihilator? The answer is no. Simple as that. And the award nominations, as I've told you before, has nothing to do with prowess either (Just because Psychosprout won an award doesn't mean it's the greatest robot that ever existed, right?). Battles are the most important aspect of any robot, in particular the UK competition. CBFan 09:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC) ::You just argued my point. Jackson Wallop participated in two battles and won, no qualified, for one. Attila the Drum participated in four battles, qualifying for two. Unless something has changed, two is more than one. Or is that not the case? 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' 10:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC) :::Incorrect. Well, not for Jackson Wallop, but for Attila The Drum certainly. Attila only participated in one battle, and lost it. Two beats one, but one trouches over zero. :::We agreed on including the robot that got furthest in the main competition. The Annihilator is not the main competition, and thus is ignored. Remove the Annihilator, and you've got 1 win for Jackson Wallop and nothing for Attila The Drum. That's how I see it, that's what the guidelines suggest, and for once, I'm sticking with them. CBFan 10:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC) ::The guidelines clearly state that they are not set in stone. Always open to exception. Personally, I had never heard of Jackson Wallop, and still don't know what it looks like. However, I do know Attila the Drum, as a surprise entrant in the annihilator, who did severe damage to Razer. Attila is the better known, and performed better in the wars. Besides, the annihilator was still in the Fourth Wars, not part of an Extreme Series. 'GutripperSpeak 11:26, 2 April 2009 (UTC) :::Granted, yes, but even so, it would make sense to at least use them, right? Furthermore, Jackson Wallop was the more successful, not Attila, because Jackson made it off Round 1. Attila did not. It doesn't matter that it's not Extreme, because that nothing to do with the UK championships, which is what said guidelines suggest be the significant purpose. I mean, it's not like winning the annihilator gave Spikasaurus and Razer a bye through to the final, right? :::And, of course, there are going to be some people who have never heard of "Attila The Drum" either. I don't really think "Never heard of it" is going to be an excuse. :::You know, I think we need something a little more...set in stone, if you will. CBFan 11:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC) ::::I don't think we can really set these guidelines in stone because there are a few exceptions that we've all agreed on. If we agreed that all teams should have the more successful robot as the name of the article, using results in main series battles to measure success, then Mace would be chosen ahead of Gemini and I think we all agree that Gemini is the more noteworthy of the two. ::::So basically we have to decide which of the two robots is the more noteworthy, which is a difficult task in this situation. According to the guidelines it can be either the robot which got furthest in the main competition or the robot that had the most wins, so according to that it could be either of them. I would probably choose Attila the Drum because it won more battles overall and is probably the more memorable of the two, but some would argue against that. Maybe we should have a vote to settle this. Christophee 13:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC) :::::I don't think this is going to be a problem exclusive to Attila The Drum and Jackson Wallop either. I could think of several other robots which had this problem. I know, for example, that we stated that The Kraken should have priority over Victor, but when you think that Victor is the older of the two machines, I'm starting to think. :::::Maybe we should focus on these sorts of issues one series at a time, just to be on the safe side. CBFan 14:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC) Here's my idea: Take all the criteria of notability, and order each one by priority. We determine whose name goes on the title by reading the 1st guideline, and if there's a tie there, the second one, and if there's a tie there, the third one etc. Here's a sample of what it might look like, I don't know what your criteria is, so just replace my bullet points with whatever you feel is more appropriate *Which robot has the most wins in the main competition? *Which robot has the most wins in side events *Which robot has appeared in the most episodes? (recaps and flashbacks don't count) *Which robot has won more awards? *Which robot has won more award nominations? etc. So in this case, we'd look at the list and see that Jackson simply has more wins than Atilla, so Jackson's name goes on the page. I don't have a strong opinion about this either way, so don't think I'm "siding" with Jackson Wallop. What if we made sure to clearly mention in the main body of the article that this team made Atilla the Drum too? Would that be a fair compromise? RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas 17:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC) :Hmm...I must admit, you're good at controlling potential situations and coming up with compromisable ideas. CBFan 17:36, 2 April 2009 (UTC) I still disagree. But if you still think.....Toon Ganondorf (t ' 23:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC) But RA2, following your criterian just doesn't remain consistent. If we look straight away at wins in the main competition, Gemini only has three, while Mace has six. It would be better to balance all criterian, rather than just checking one, then another. 'GutripperSpeak' So essentially; *Jackson has more wins in the main competition *Attila has more success in side competitions *Attila appeared in three episodes (Pinball, Heat, Annihilator) while Jackson appeared in one. *Neither received any awards *Attila received a nomination Criteria balances three to one. I think that points to Attila. Any other arguements? 'GutripperSpeak' 21:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC) :That could work too, I like it. As an add-on, I'd like to suggest that in the event that the robots have the same number of "points" we settle the tie by looking at which robot has a point in the highest-tier catergory., 'RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas 21:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC) Or just the later one if the highest tier one is a draw, like Victor and Kraken. All right. I concur with this too. I'll put these in the Style Guide for future reference. Toon Ganondorf (t ' 23:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC) :Wait, I thought that Victor 1 and Victor 2 were counted the same robot, meaning that technically Victor has had 2 appearances while Kraken has had 1. 'RA2; aka Resetti's Replicas 00:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC) Oh. I guess with our new guidelines that that would be correct. But unless someone wants to make Victor's article in the near future, I really can't say. 'Toon Ganondorf (t ' 00:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC) :I like the new guidelines you guys have drawn up. I hope it makes situations like this a lot clearer in the future. Christophee 00:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC) Team Name In Series 4, Berny Rider introduces them as Team Battlebot. So should this be the Team name? Llamaman201 (talk) 18:46, March 15, 2010 (UTC) :Is the name we currently have official or is it one of the names we made up? If we made it up then we should probably replace it with the official name. Christophee (talk) 14:02, March 16, 2010 (UTC) ::I'm fairly sure that Team Drum is made up. 'TG (t ' 19:40, March 16, 2010 (UTC) :::Okay, let's switch to the other name then. Christophee (talk) 02:10, March 18, 2010 (UTC) Atilla vs Attila Can we do something about this, possibly? The two spellings are used throughout the wikia, sometimes in the same sentence, and obviously only one is right. CrashBash (talk) 17:24, April 24, 2014 (UTC) :I always thought it was Attila. What evidence do we have for each? Christophee (talk) 19:23, April 24, 2014 (UTC) ::Look at any article that mentions it and you'll pretty much see we use either or. Heck, this article uses both. We need to do something about that. CrashBash (talk) 19:47, April 24, 2014 (UTC) :::Attila is correct, as what it was named after Attila the Hun, and Attila was used when introducing the machine in Heat A, as well as on the Southern Annihilator battleboard. Only on the Heat A battleboard was it shown as Atilla. '''ManUCrazy (talk) 20:50, April 24, 2014 (UTC) :Mainspace fixed. Jimlaad43(talk) 22:51, April 24, 2014 (UTC) Fourth team member - Helen ??? I was watching the Southern Annihilator today (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ7J1yXYLkg), and I noticed that one of the team members of the team in the Annihilator was not present in their main competition or pinball appearances. Her first name is said to be Helen, but because the statistic board was reused from the main competition, it dosen't list her, instead listing Tony Knapp, and the team and Jonathan Pearce just call her Helen. Now, the team's other robot had a team member called Helen Thorpe, so it is possible that was the same person. Now, I've included a picture of the Jackson Wallop team, but the quality of Series 7 Heat B on YouTube is very poor, so it's hard to judge from that (could someone upload a DVD/Challenge quality version?). Should we assume it is Helen Thorpe, or just put "Helen ???", like "Elaine ???" from Inverterbrat? Drop Zone mk2 (talk) 17:52, September 15, 2016 (UTC) :Having uploaded a higher quality picture, and compared the two, it does seem that the "Helen" from Series 4 is the same woman who fought with Jackson Wallop. Should I list her as part of the team? Drop Zone mk2 (talk) 20:33, October 23, 2016 (UTC) ::Certainly. [[User:ToastUltimatum|'Toast']][[User talk:ToastUltimatum|'Ultimatum']] 01:34, October 24, 2016 (UTC)